On Fri, 21 Mar 2003 15:47:35 -0600 Jamin Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Couldn't they just package 4.x as exim4 and leave 3.x as is for those > already using it? Then if someone installs 4.x, display several > warnings about config file compatibility and such.
Problem is a lot of people ignore those warnings. That's because most of
the time the warning is meaningless in that they warn people of a config file
change that could cause problems and in 99.9% of the time it doesn't. It
leads to the "yeah, yeah, whatever" syndrome.
Also since Exim is a base package a little more care has to go into it.
If it were an optional package sure, they could do that. However an upgrade
of a base package can cause serious problems if not handled properly.
Considering Debian's well deserved reputation of stability is it any wonder
that a problem like this exists.
Finally, how would one package a later version of Exim without it
resulting in an upgrade on automatic runs? Do we really need to start putting
the version number in the package name now, IE exim4? That's about the only
way I see it getting around it as I think even the epoc(?) notation will go
for a higher epoc.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
| -- Lenny Nero - Strange Days
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
